Canon aiming for a $799 full-frame camera? [CR2]

[Chig]

Full frame *is* better than APS-C in almost any situation, objectively. APS-C’s advantages are lower system cost and smaller size.

For wildlife, I’d choose a 1-series body and 600/4 lens over any APS-C or m4/3 every single time. But I’m fortunate enough to be able to afford a >$20K wildlife photography setup and have the strength and stamina to use it in the field.

Regardless, the ‘FF is better’ mantra is well-accepted. By releasing a sub-$1K FF body, Canon likely expects to drive RF lens sales strongly, and they’re likely correct about that.

Yep , you're very lucky to be able to afford a 600mm f/4 lens but very few people can and personally I wouldn't want one even if I could afford one because they're far too heavy to hand hold .
If I could afford one I'd choose the EF400 DO ii as it's light enough to hand hold and works great with T.Cs
I'd always choose a crop sensor given the choice.
People say you can just crop the image of a full frame sensor anyway but why use the full frame if you need to crop every time ? Just have a cropped sensor.

 

[dcm]

Here’s a little comparison of the M6II and M5 APS-C bodies with the RP and SL3 bodies with similar lenses. The M5 and M6 are similar size other than the EVF hump. I think the RP body is about the smallest RF form factor they can go other than removing the hump. Similarly, the SL3 appears to be the smallest EF form factor.

I eyeballed the RF 24-240 on my M5 and M6II. The limiting factor is the lens barrel outer diameter (not the mount diameter) to make room for your fingers between the lens and grip. With the 60mm OD for both the mount and the lenses on the EF-M series they can bring the grip in. But many RF lenses have barrels larger than the mount, like the 80mm OD for my RF 24-240 versus the 70mm OD RF mount The mirror box on the SL3 alleviates this a bit by pushing the lens forward so the lens barrel interferes less with the grip.

I doubt we will see M size bodies with RF mounts. The RP is about as small as they can go, unless you want to remove or reinvent the grip as well…..

Compact Camera Meter

Compare unlimited number of cameras with lenses, see how compact or bulky a camera is and sort by height, width, depth and weight.

camerasize.com

 

[sanj]

Yep , you're very lucky to be able to afford a 600mm f/4 lens but very few people can and personally I wouldn't want one even if I could afford one because they're far too heavy to hand hold .
If I could afford one I'd choose the EF400 DO ii as it's light enough to hand hold and works great with T.Cs
I'd always choose a crop sensor given the choice.
People say you can just crop the image of a full frame sensor anyway but why use the full frame if you need to crop every time ? Just have a cropped sensor.

"but why use the full frame if you need to crop every time ? Just have a cropped sensor." THIS!

 

[David - Sydney]

I have an S120 as well, decent but not great. Check out the G series.

I went through the S90/100/120 with underwater housings and then RX100iii before I realised that it was just going to be better to get a housing for my 5Div at the time. The price difference betwen compact camera + housing was about the same as for my main camera on land with much better AF/fps/high ISO and better raw processing ability. I didn't think that you could still buy the S series given the state of the camera phone market

 

[OneSnark]

<<snip>>

I mean the people that want a small and cheap ‘real camera’ are not the same people that want a reach limit busting 7D replacement.

The first group have the M system. It is small and comparatively cheap, it has the lenses most users will actually use on it too. It is very feature rich with excellent AF and fps.

<<snip>

The 7D II cost $1,799 and the 100-400II $2,399, total $4,198. An R5 costs $3,899 the RF800 $899, total $4,798. Thats $600 more six years later with longer reach, more than twice the mp and fps, and MUCH better AF, all things reach limited shooters say they want. Downside is one stop of dof.

So why don’t those mythical R7 supposed buyers put their brains in gear and realize they already have it!

The M6 MkII is a full featured "M" series crop body. I would buy the system in an instant, except that the associated glass is a bit slow for my tastes. And it seems to me that they release 3 bodies for every lens they release. . . .which tells me (a lens snob of the 1st order) that I should look else where.

The "RF" system issue. . . in my mind. . . . .is that the the lenses are flat out too expensive. It "seems" to me that the the 100-400/EF which I could get pre-covid for $1800 was replaced by the 100-500. . .which at $2700 you can't even buy (well, maybe with a wait list). There are no "good buys" in the RF world

(to be fair. . . . over the last 10 years canon was introducing new EF versions of old EF lenses with major price markup every few years. . . so I just view the RF pricing as part of that trend).

I have an S120 as well, decent but not great. Check out the G series.

The canon S120 was a GREAT camera. . . a good P&S companion for a dSLR. . . .and a good camera that you could "risk" in public places and whatnot (in terms of simply losing or breaking it).

The "S" series is no longer sold. There are a few "G"s that can replace it. I had a G7 II; great little camera. . . .barely pocketable but really nice images. Current version is the Mk III. I replaced the G7 mk II (due to GAS) with a G5 mk II. . . . .an even better camera; but just on the wrong side of "pocketable". I still take the G5Xii everywhere. . .

 

[Chig]

Of course yes. Let's wait and see. I would suspect there is enough demand.

Yep , I suspect that Canon thinks that bird photography (which is what a lot us 7D crowd like ) is a worthwhile segment otherwise why did they spend millions developing af algorithms for birds ?

 

[Sporgon]

a FF one that otherwise piles compromises on top of compromises à la the RP.

How on earth can you claim the RP piles compromises on top of compromises ? Outside of really niche, specialist areas there’s pretty well nothing that camera can’t do. Even the build is good for the price. Having used an RP along side my 5DS cameras for a while I’m not surprised Canon is able to come out with a cheaper, lower cost model.

 

[adrian_bacon]

Not sure about a benefit, but at least to me a crop body with a good, 90D/7D2/M62 level feature set is much more attractive a value proposition than a FF one that otherwise piles compromises on top of compromises à la the RP.

I have the RP. With the RF 50 STM or the RF 35 Macro, that thing is already a wonderfully small and light camera. As an every day walk around 'point and shoot' type camera, it's actually quite performant and the simplified feature set is perfect for that type of shooting. If I'm looking to get serious, then I'll pull out my R5 or R6, depending on what I'm looking to do. It's literally gotten to the point where I haven't taken my little M5 out at all since I've had the RP. Yeah, the RP is bigger than the M5, but in all honesty, not by much.

 

[koenkooi]

I have the RP. With the RF 50 STM or the RF 35 Macro, that thing is already a wonderfully small and light camera. As an every day walk around 'point and shoot' type camera, it's actually quite performant and the simplified feature set is perfect for that type of shooting. If I'm looking to get serious, then I'll pull out my R5 or R6, depending on what I'm looking to do. It's literally gotten to the point where I haven't taken my little M5 out at all since I've had the RP. Yeah, the RP is bigger than the M5, but in all honesty, not by much.

I sold my RP to get the R5 and I'm while I love the better ergonomics with large lenses, I miss having a really small FF camera. While the M6II had a better AF system than the RP, the lenses couldn't keep up; the focus motor in the EF-M32mm is very slow.
So a small, cheap RF mount camera would be great when coupled with the RF50 f/1.8. I would prefer that eye-AF-in-servo trickles down from the M6II to an M300, but I'm not sure that's going to happen soon.

 

[adrian_bacon]

The only other thing that I would love to see is bigger battery than the EOS RP.

The RPs battery actually lasts quite a while. I wouldn't turn the camera on and just leave it on and expect the battery to last all day, but it's certainly not turn it on and ~30 minutes later you're done. I've been using my RP to shoot some videos and shockingly, I can record quite a lot of video before the battery even becomes remotely close to getting empty. Same for photos. As long as you don't just leave it on, you can shoot way more than you'd think you could before the battery dies. It's been a pleasant surprise for me. I thought for sure I'd be super unhappy with the RPs battery and would want a camera with at least the standard LP-E6, but I've been pleasantly pleased with its performance.

 

[sanj]

Yep , I suspect that Canon thinks that bird photography (which is what a lot us 7D crowd like ) is a worthwhile segment otherwise why did they spend millions developing af algorithms for birds ?

There are others, besides bird photographers, that want a crop camera with lenses to go along.

 

[sanj]

Just because RF800 is a light lens does not mean that there should not be a crop camera! The RF800 equivalant for the crop camera will be yet lighter and probably cheaper.

 

[adrian_bacon]

So a small, cheap RF mount camera would be great when coupled with the RF50 f/1.8.

I'd really love for Canon to come out with a little pancake RF 40 at either f/2.8 or f/2. That would get the RP down to almost pocketable.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

And what doesn’t the M system already do for those people?

Nobody answers the logical questions, they just say the same things over and over.

1) They want access to RF lenses.
2) They want a higher-end APS-C camera than it would make sense for Canon to bring to the M system. (A mirrorless 7D)

 

[EOS 4 Life]

The Canon M system will never compete for ‘real’ photographers to the Fuji system, it will never get the lens options or investment Fuji have put into the X series. Don’t forget Fuji don’t make ff cameras so 90% of their R&D goes into their crop sensor cameras and lenses.

Am I not understanding correctly or didn't you answer your own question of what people want from the M system that it does not provide?

 

[Cyborx]

Pro’s pay 6000 for the new R3.
Amateurs pay 999 for the new RP.
Canon, you’ve lost me there...

STOP OVERPRICING PRO GEAR NOW!!!

 

[Hobby]

I sold my RP to get the R5 and I'm while I love the better ergonomics with large lenses, I miss having a really small FF camera. While the M6II had a better AF system than the RP, the lenses couldn't keep up; the focus motor in the EF-M32mm is very slow.
So a small, cheap RF mount camera would be great when coupled with the RF50 f/1.8. I would prefer that eye-AF-in-servo trickles down from the M6II to an M300, but I'm not sure that's going to happen soon.

Exactly. I like my little RP for the size and IQ but have no RF lenses... It is big with my adapted EF 24-70 f/2.8. I have an M100 with Sigma 30/56 f/1.4 EF-m. And for that eye-AF that you mention, I am now considering that M50 Mark ii. Perhaps M50ii also for you? (I cannot see my M100 screen in sun, and miss an EVF, so M100 is not good with my eyes/glasses and I will skip that "M300"...) (and slightly Off-topic: my G5Xii with EVF delivers really very nice photo's)

 

[Chig]

Just because RF800 is a light lens does not mean that there should not be a crop camera! The RF800 equivalant for the crop camera will be yet lighter and probably cheaper.

I doubt an RF-s version of the RF800mm f/11 could be smaller or cheaper as the entrance pupil would be exactly the same minimum diameter of 73mm (because 800 / 11 = 73mm) only the small elements at the camera lens could be a bit smaller which wouldn't make a significant difference.
A lot of people assume a crop version of a big telephoto such as the 600mm f/4 would be smaller but in reality they'd be virtually identical .
To get f/4 aperture the entrance pupil of any 600mm lens must be 150mm so the the front element has to be at least this size.
For different sensor size the small elements at the camera end vary to suit but they're tiny anyway so the overall size of the lens stays roughly the same.
The RF800mm f/11 is tiny because it has a very small maximum aperture and it's fairly short because of Canon using fresnel DO lens elements.
It's also very low grade unsealed plastic construction too and not suited to wildlife / sports in adverse weather.

 

[David - Sydney]

There are others, besides bird photographers, that want a crop camera with lenses to go along.

Can you elaborate?
I get the small/cheap (rebel) segment and the "reach" segment which birders have been associated with. The M series with EF-m/EF-s/EF lenses meets the first category and PBD makes a good point for R5+RF800mm (or R6+RF100-500mm) for cost/reach/Dof vs 7Dii+EF100-400mm

 

[Navyo Eller]

Surely the M system has it's vantages, it's small first of all. That is compelling vantage over all other Canon offerings. It can produce high quality images, ok video specs. I guess that covers a lot of people.The R system is quite expensive for the average amateur, good lenses cost there price too.

Coming from semi-pro to relaxed enthusiast I enjoy highly the M system, specially M50 and M6 Mark II. With the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS , EF-M 20/2 EF-M 32/1.4 , EF-M 11-22/3.5-5.6 I have now a package a third of the previous weight and maybe half of size with whom I can shoot very nice pictures/videos.

I am fully aware of the R series "FF" and it's advantages, but if I am not rich or live from my photo/video production, the M series is way more than needed for the vast majority of amateur or enthusiast photographer in my view. The R system is the way to go for serious pro work (with R5/R6) and semi-pro (RP/R) and people without budget problems.

My hope is for a slightly better weather sealing , maybe IBIS or stacked sensor in a M6 m III or M 50 m III, then the M series will make a very nice package. For me not even need new lenses, with the adapter, a huge selection of professional grade lenses are there.

The M system is already best selling for Canon worldwide and has indeed a future. With little upgrades for more rough use, and as others mentioned, it already best selling for Canon worldwide, it could for quite long time ahead also lure many 7D users.

The R system is for the semi-pro and pro and that's a great system and offering from Canon. There is for me no competition and Canon will spend it's budget where it makes profit, not on my preferences or anyone else.

That's my 2cent.
For the rest, let us take pictures and enjoy photo- and videography.